TradeIt Bloghttps://blog.trade.it
Tue, 15 Jan 2019 22:25:25 +0000 en
hourly
1 http://wordpress.com/https://secure.gravatar.com/blavatar/e32b794d98b0aa4de1bf44ce05343d50?s=96&d=https%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fbuttonw-com.pngTradeIt Bloghttps://blog.trade.it
The Passing of the Screen Scraping Batonhttps://blog.trade.it/2019/01/15/the-passing-of-the-screen-scraping-baton/
https://blog.trade.it/2019/01/15/the-passing-of-the-screen-scraping-baton/#respondTue, 15 Jan 2019 22:08:17 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5352Continue reading The Passing of the Screen Scraping Baton]]>The FinTech world is buzzing with news of Plaid buying Quovo. Hats off to Quovo’s founder, Lowell, who’s built an excellent reputation in the industry for innovation, professionalism and proprietary technology to enable screen scraping. We’ve received over a dozen inquiries from partners, investors and prognosticators on what the deal means, and, while we have no insider information, we have a few thoughts given our earlier blog series on screen scraping.

There are a few lenses to look at this deal as it relates to what it means to the FinTech space and why it makes sense. We’re going to break it down based on three factors: market structure drivers, systemic reasons and direct reasons.

Market Structure Drivers

The FinTech world is embracing APIs as the most effective way to interact between institutions, apps and developers — as PSD2 in Europe leads the way. Asian countries are already adopting API protocols. However, since the US has not developed a standard or unified protocol, we can expect more jockeying between screen scrapers and financial institutions, as we saw earlier this year with Plaid & CapitalOne. As long as the US doesn’t mandate standards, screen scraping companies are going to look to gain greater scale and leverage against the more fragmented financial institutions (when’s the last time you saw Citi, JPMorgan, Fidelity & Schwab join forces to protect customer data?).

With 40-70% of FIs website traffic coming from screen scraping companies providing access to Personal Financial Management apps like Mint, FIs have finally woken up to the need to provide secure, controlled access to their products in an increasingly unbundled and distributed world. FIs are going to require customers to use oAuth to ensure proper security and controls, but traditional US screen scraping companies don’t look favorably on oAuth due to the user experience. The Plaid/CapitalOne battle was a preview of things to come between screen scrapers and Fis, requiring scrapers to go through the front door, not the back.

Systemic Reasons

If you’re in the screen scraping business and do a value chain analysis, you want to own your own destiny and technology. Screen scrapers exist for a simple reason: to make it easy for FinTechs to enable their clients or customers to aggregate their data in one spot. The screen scrapers create simple and easy to use APIs that customers can integrate and these APIs use screen scraping technology behind the scenes. The technology learns the layout, data formatting and access placements for thousands of FIs, which allows the scrapers to easily enable customers to share their credentials in order to gain entry into the FI. The FI is not a party to this access, it’s a back door. Not all screen scraping companies do this themselves. Quovo did it with robust and secure technology, as do Yodlee and Finicity who often provide their technology to other screen scraping companies like Plaid and MX.

Data security couldn’t be more paramount to FIs. As much as customers like to demonize banks, banks have done a lot more to protect customer information than big Silicon Valley tech companies. If your user name and password were breached by a portal, hotel company or social network in the last year, it’s likely that the user name and password combination was sold on the dark web. Bad actors on the dark web then run scripts testing your credentials against FIs to get access to your funds. And, while the Fis are proactively monitoring their front door, what many have found is that the bad actors run the scripts via sites using screen scraping to identify vulnerable accounts via the back door. Herein lies the rub. Screen scrapers don’t want to put speed bumps into the user journey, but FIs are requiring oAuth through the front door. Something has to give, and hopefully it won’t be caused by a breach of your financial information.

Direct Reasons

Plaid and Quovo were direct competitors with similar offerings which could lead to downward pressure on prices. Consolidation will likely allow the combined entity to test price elasticity. Yodlee was the Grand Daddy of screen scraping. Early on, Yodlee bought Vertical One for customers, pricing power and leverage. Yodlee is now owned by Envestnet who has publicly stated that they’ve been focused on making the acquisition pay, meaning they’re increasing prices.

Plaid stated that Quovo’s offering in the wealth space was a driving force for the acquisition. Yodlee and Morningstar® ByAllAccountsSMhave a solid grip on the wealth space, however a combined Plaid/Quovo could result in a greater penetration. And, it doesn’t hurt that Quovo’s founder hails from a storied wealth management lineage, adding to his wealth sector cred.

Finally, the brands of Plaid and Quovo resonate differently in the broader financial space. Plaid is loved by Silicon Valley FinTechs and Quovo is well-regarded by the established FIs.

In sum, while the financial terms are not readily available, the strategic fit of Plaid and Quovo makes sense — leverage, scale, reputation and technology. Just as Yodlee’s founder stepped away last week from leading his company, the baton (and screen scraping team captain) is now with Plaid’s leadership — run fast and innovate often.

]]>https://blog.trade.it/2019/01/15/the-passing-of-the-screen-scraping-baton/feed/0Screen Shot 2016-05-19 at 4.07.22 PMbetsytradeitWhat does 2019 hold for FinTech?https://blog.trade.it/2019/01/02/2019-predictions/
https://blog.trade.it/2019/01/02/2019-predictions/#respondWed, 02 Jan 2019 21:29:22 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5346Continue reading What does 2019 hold for FinTech?]]>2018 had its fair share of disruption in the FinTech space, but for the most part, companies and investors sat out the end of the year market fluctuations and are cautiously — and perhaps optimistically — looking to 2019. The latest downturn is definitely not unexpected, and if the market continues to soften as most have predicted, we expect to see more acquisitions in FinTech, as investors tighten their belts.

Here are our thoughts on what potential market moves might include:

Chinese FinTechs make another go at the US market

As highlighted in the MIT Technology Review, the Chinese market is much more innovative and disruptive than the US FinTech Market. While the Alipay-Moneygram tie-up failed with regulators, it won’t deter the ambitions of these cash-rich companies. Notably, Alipay, TenCent, Fosun, CreditEase and PingAn continue to be ever-present at US FinTech conferences, networking, looking to deploy capital, and tempting entrepreneurs with cash offers. Expect to see Chinese companies buying smaller FinTech companies that allow them to fly below the radar of regulators, yet buy and scale with US teams that have strong operating reputations.

Betterment or WealthFront might get acquired by a smaller incumbent who’s looking to chase down Vanguard and Schwab’s market dominance

N26’s move to the US from Europe will gain ground in the investment world based on their API platform approach

The German mobile bank just received the largest equity financing round in the FinTech industry in Germany to date, as well as one of the largest in Europe. According to their Americas CEO, Nicolas Kopp, they’re “a technology company with a bank license.” Because N26 was built from scratch, and their European roots means they have to comply with PSD2, they’re prepared for open banking protocols. Their design was specifically built for mobile — to be both visually appealing and user friendly, and they support/use APIs, not siloing technology for different lines of business, creating a seamless user experience. And they’ve AI-enabled their platform, allowing them to create more personalization at scale. We’re curious to see what else they have up their sleeve.

What are some of your FinTech predictions for 2019? Share them with us on Twitter using #TradeIt2019 and #FinTechPredictions

]]>https://blog.trade.it/2019/01/02/2019-predictions/feed/0YearAhead Graphic.001betsytradeitWhat Does It Mean That Incumbents Are Embracing Crypto?https://blog.trade.it/2018/11/16/what-does-it-mean-that-incumbents-are-embracing-crypto/
https://blog.trade.it/2018/11/16/what-does-it-mean-that-incumbents-are-embracing-crypto/#respondFri, 16 Nov 2018 16:47:19 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5342Continue reading What Does It Mean That Incumbents Are Embracing Crypto?]]>Has Crypto Gone Legit?

It might have been easy in recent years for incumbents, mass market investors and generally the mainstream to dismiss cryptocurrency for several reasons. It’s volatile. It exists virtually. It’s all about anonymity. It’s not regulated. It cuts out the middleman. It was created by a community of developers. For years, the virtual currency seemed more an underground fad than a true and legit financial resource. But that finally appears to be changing.

Crypto Gets Institutionalized

With the recent announcement from Goldman Sachs that they’ve teamed with billionaire Michael Novogratz to invest in BitGo, a startup that aims to help institutional investors securely store their cryptocurrency, crypto may no longer be the red-headed step child of finance. Between them, Goldman and Galaxy Digital Ventures are investing about $16 million in BitGo. And while this amount is a drop in the bucket for Goldman and Novogratz, it certainly indicates the incumbents taking crypto seriously and realizing their customers are looking for the option to not only invest but have a safe place to keep these investments.

Beyond security, Fidelity is taking it a step further, rolling out their own standalone company, Fidelity Digital Asset Services (FDAS). The world’s 5th-largest asset manager has established FDAS for their clients, hedge funds, and FIs to trade and store cryptocurrency. With $7.2 trillion in assets under management, 27 million customers and 13,000+ institutional clients, Fidelity might seem an unlikely candidate to hop on the crypto bandwagon, but they do spend $2.5 billion per year on technology, partially through incubators that house its artificial intelligence and blockchain projects.

As more and more younger investors are embracing robos and ETFs vs. actively managed portfolios, the dollars being invested are shifting. As we look ahead to where the assets are going, it’s impossible not to wonder what this means for the economics of the investment firms, asset managers and brokers. ETFs are growing and they’re also a lower cost investment vehicle. Schwab’s annual report is a great example of how assets are flowing into lower cost investment options (ETF growth is booming – up 19%) and the number of client accounts continues to grow (more on that later). But while it’s always good to see growth, and great to know people are investing (!), does this mean there’s a reset coming as it relates to the fees generated (or not) by investment products?

For large incumbents there’s a cushion, because they’re more diversified as it relates to product offerings, and in turn, revenue streams. But with the shift to a lower cost product like ETFs, and the combination of Millennials pouring money in and Boomers pulling money out, there’s less investing in traditional mutual funds, creating a shift in how incumbents need to think about their revenue streams. And while these companies are seeing gains, with Schwab’s stock price up over a 10 year period, what does this mean for their long term offerings and strategy?

And while Gen X and Boomers might be investing in ETFs, the majority of them and their dollars are invested in mutual funds and/actively managed portfolios. These represent greater asset volumes and are also higher cost products.

Will there be a pendulum shift?

It does appear that way. As older generations move into retirement and withdraw funds, the AUM in traditional mutual funds, actively managed portfolios and among advisory solutions will decline. But, because younger generations are continuing to earn and earn more, it’s likely they’ll continue to pump more into ETFs. The set-it-and-forget-it type investing is ripe for this new audience who wants to dip their toes in the water, including the introduction and usage of target funds as options in 401Ks and IRAs. In fact, according to Statistica as of 2018, passive investing is growing exponentially in the US:

AUM in the Robo-Advisors segment currently amounts to $283 Billion

AUM are expected to show an annual growth rate (CAGR 2018-2022) of 22.8% resulting in the total amount of $643 Billion by 2022

In the Robo-Advisors segment, the number of users is expected to amount to 12 Million by 2022

The average AUM per user in the Robo-Advisors segment amounts to $43,039

Bringing it back to Schwab, their active brokerage accounts are up 6%, their total client assets are up 21% and their proprietary mutual funds are up 19%.

However, total assets among their ETFs more than doubled from 2013 to 2017, an astounding $204 vs $436B. From 2016 to 2017 alone, that was a CAGR of 37% among ETFs vs. 20% for mutual funds during the same period. And only 7% when you look specifically at Schwab’s proprietary mutual funds.

Some final thoughts:

As more investors jump on the ETF & Robo bandwagon and less use full service advisory services and higher cost Mutual Funds, what happens to the fee structure of these firms as more assets move to the lower cost products?

Will there be a need to create a new model and what will that model look like?

While you read a lot about news publishers complicated relationships with Facebook and Google, the investing space has long been dependent on two oceans for referral traffic — Twitter and Yahoo! Finance. Yahoo! Finance was the original aggregator that fed the referral traffic which built every online company from Marketwatch to SeekingAlpha. The challenger to Yahoo! Finance is not another website but a social network: Twitter, which has more impressions in a week for the top 30 equities than Yahoo! Finance does in a month. With TicToc, Bloomberg is harnessing the Twitter audience to build a counter weight to Yahoo! Finance. We like to think about Yahoo! Finance and Twitter as the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, feeding the tributaries of Bloomberg, Marketwatch, The Street, WSJ, Motley Fool, Forbes and so many more who depend on their mighty engines to flow.

TicToc Dough

It’s clear that externally sourced traffic is only going to increase as more engines feed more content to more places. Bloomberg, for example, gets most of their traffic off network, meaning that most traffic comes from other content providers and social media platforms, as seen from the charts below. A large portion of this can be attributed to their massive Twitter presence as TicToc. With close to 400K followers, 2.2 million average daily views and 1.4 million average daily viewers, this handle drives large amounts of users to their platform and largely increases their brand awareness. It also shows the burgeoning power and importance of Twitter in the finance world.

We conducted an analysis of the engagement that’s generated from top equity cashtags, as well as other major market movers from the S&P 100, over 32 randomly selected days and found that average impressions/day accumulate to almost 8MM and reach almost 5MM users.

That’s more than Yahoo! Finance, which gets 70MM visitors per month. Yahoo! Finance’s traffic mainly comes from people going directly to the site or via the mobile app, as well as those who come from links to the site within Google Search results.

No Longer Siloed

With the bulk of web traffic today coming from outside platforms, social or otherwise, the landscape for financial news consumption is shifting. Essentially, we have a hugely fragmented ecosystem where people go to get their finance news and it’s even more fragmented in how they got there. One thing’s for sure, it’s only going to get more disparate as platforms and the digital ecosystem evolve.

]]>https://blog.trade.it/2018/09/28/distribution-matters/feed/0Group 5niconagel23Screen Shot 2018-09-28 at 10.38.47 AM.pngScreen Shot 2018-09-28 at 10.39.56 AM.pngScreen Shot 2018-09-27 at 3.16.44 PM.pngLand of the Free (Trade)https://blog.trade.it/2018/09/14/land-of-the-free-trade/
https://blog.trade.it/2018/09/14/land-of-the-free-trade/#respondFri, 14 Sep 2018 20:37:04 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5320Continue reading Land of the Free (Trade)]]>What happens to competition when everything is free, when there’s no obvious financial differentiator? How do you get customers to choose you over the other guys?

With the recent bomb dropped by JPMorgan that they’d be offering free trades to everyone via their new You Invest Trade Service, brokerages are on high alert and looking to understand how this will affect them and the market. Certainly JPMorgan is the first incumbent—but not the last—to make a serious move in this space, and while fintechs like RobinHood built their platforms on free trades, they have less overhead and less offering to contend with. In other words, the incumbent fall out is likely much more significant. But the potential is also astronomical for those who do it right.

How Will You Stand Out?

Since it appears that trading is becoming a commodity with a race to lower pricing until it’s ultimately free, the competition is going to have to create other factors in order to differentiate themselves going forward. As we’ve posted about in the past, these could include user experience and ease of use and delighting customers via good design. As well as attracting new customers. (More on that in a bit.) But there is so much more FIs can do. In fact, no financial company has leveraged the full platform like Expedia has in the travel category or Amazon in the consumer shopping space. This industry is stuck in the mid/late 90’s, whereas consumer spending platforms have evolved and changed with or even ahead of the time. Finance needs to up their game.

Here’s how we see things evolving:

Pricing is No Longer a 2-Year Study

Gone are the days where pricing used to be modelled out with firms conducting tons of research and testing before changing their fee structure. Today, FIs need to be more nimble and push out pricing changes to be immediately responsive to market changes and influences. Being able to pivot or better yet, being first out of the gate, could make or break a new pricing strategy. And leave everyone else scrambling.

Market Cap Erosion

With their announcement, JPMorgan shaved $9B off the market cap of everyone else. With the trading fee revenue stream eliminated, it impacts all companies as it relates to their valuation and market cap.So if brokerages remove trading fees, where will that “lost” revenue come from? Several incumbents have said they too could go to $0 trading, particularly in a rising interest rate environment, but why do it if you don’t have to?

For example, You Invest will offer free portfolio-building tools and access to the bank’s stock research allowing customers to construct a portfolio composed of cheap ETFs and stocks. This sets up Morgan to create its own passive investment vehicles, essentially getting that fee back albeit in a way that serves the consumer and the bank. So, by offering free trades, JPMorgan could actually grow the business as customers use other services.

Remains of the Day

Time will tell what no fee means for incumbents, or if JPMorgan resorts back to a more traditional fee structure. In the meantime, one thing is for sure, and that’s that nothing is for sure. FIs are going to have to look to other industries to see how they can model a more robust and streamlined offering, tap into untapped customers and still find a way to grow their bottom line.

]]>https://blog.trade.it/2018/09/14/land-of-the-free-trade/feed/0Group 4niconagel23Incumbents vs. FinTechs: Product Offer Throwdownhttps://blog.trade.it/2018/08/23/incumbents-vs-fintechs-product-offer-throwdown/
https://blog.trade.it/2018/08/23/incumbents-vs-fintechs-product-offer-throwdown/#respondThu, 23 Aug 2018 14:26:26 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5314Continue reading Incumbents vs. FinTechs: Product Offer Throwdown]]>Previously, we have done comparisons on mobile account opening and the design of these offerings as it relates to incumbents vs. FinTechs, so we thought it only fair to do a more detailed comparison based on product offerings and where the industry is headed. While you can call our design evaluation subjective, our side by side product and feature comparison demonstrates how the large incumbents serve a stronger set of offerings to a broader base of investors, but at the expense of simplicity. While the FinTechs have limited offering but a more honed feature set.

Set-It-And-Forget-It

Pretty much everyone is working on some form of a robo, and many have already started their own. In fact, due to competition for passive investors from low fee, automated investing startups like Wealthfront and Betterment, incumbents (Schwab, Fidelity, E*TRADE, TD Ameritrade) were quick to roll out at least one automated investing account and many now offer more than one option.

The start-ups are forcing banks and brokers to adopt technology faster than ever before, while the established players are pushing the robos to incorporate more traditional services in their products. In fact, many of the digital-only startups are layering in human advice to complement their automated offerings. This should give pause to any incumbent, or at the very least, make them rethink their features and user experience.

Robinhood, which earlier this year added crypto trading, only offers this feature in select states. Square added crypto trading to their Cash app in late January, with Square Cash averaging 2M downloads per month, 3x the growth rate of Venmo. Coinbase surpassed Charles Schwab in the number of open accounts in late 2017 (11.7M vs. 10.6M), but the value of those accounts is still a fraction of the value of Schwab ($50B vs. $3.26T)

While all of the challengers in the investing space have well-defined customer journeys and easy to use interfaces, there’s still a large difference in the breadth of the offering. Customers with specialized needs (securities lending, bonds, futures, trust capabilities, advanced options tools) will probably be better served by more established players. While customers seeking to simply capture market returns with excess cash will probably enjoy the better digital experience and onboarding provided by the newer players in retail brokerage.

What interests us is how both facets are pushing the others to be better. FinTech is pushing the incumbents to simplify, while the incumbents are pushing fintech to be more than just a pretty interface. But the question is, will anyone become the Amazon of investing? Will anyone ever have everything for everyone? And what will that look like? Time will certainly tell.

More and more APIs are being adopted across all industries—travel (Google Maps), food/entertainment (OpenTable, Spotify), communication (What’sApp, Messenger, WeChat). Companies like Button are partnering with brands to help distribute their offerings to a large developer community and that are eager to strengthen their mobile experience via the use of APIs. APIs, to these organizations, equal opportunity, and access.

However, when looking at the Finance industry, banks and brokerages are lagging behind in API adoption. Screen-scraping—which we’ve written about numerous times—doesn’t allow for reliable data connections to banks and is a huge security risk. However, screenscrapers are widely used and via the halo effect, end users are tricked into submitting their information that results in loss of control over their own data. All of that can be alleviated with the adoption of APIs which use information in a more effective and efficient way. APIs still allow data sharing but in a way that creates a safe, seamless experience for both users and creators.

1 Venkat Atluri, Miklos Dietz and Nicolaus Henke, “Competing in a world of sectors without borders,” McKinsey, July 2017

]]>https://blog.trade.it/2018/08/17/times-running-out-to-adopt-an-api-strategy/feed/0Grouptradingticketf2.jpgCan AI Drive Alpha for ETFs?https://blog.trade.it/2018/08/02/can-ai-drive-alpha-for-etfs/
https://blog.trade.it/2018/08/02/can-ai-drive-alpha-for-etfs/#respondThu, 02 Aug 2018 14:37:07 +0000http://blog.trade.it/?p=5303Continue reading Can AI Drive Alpha for ETFs?]]>In our previous post we touched on the potential of an ETF bubble. The exponential growth of ETFs, especially from younger investors who want to set-it-and-forget-it, means there’s an opportunity for providers to increasingly use Artificial Intelligence in smart alpha and active products. But what can AI do for your business and investment strategy?

Like Humans, Only Better, Faster, Smarter

AI tools can intake data, learn from it, and act on it to meet specific objectives. But they can do it more quickly and efficiently. In fact, machines running AI algorithms can process large amounts of data in the blink of an eye. Market data is dynamic. Machines can react instantly to fluctuations to best identify ideal investment strategies. They can also read through thousands of pages of market reports in seconds, while simultaneously connecting new market signals with recent ones detected in other markets. It would take a fund manager hours to do the same thing a machine can do in split seconds.

AI Has No Ego or Emotion

Investors tend to make poor decisions because it’s their money they could lose. Money is emotional. But machines don’t get stressed, tired, or angry. There’s no winning or losing. They operate in a purely logical manner and make decisions based only on evidence and indicators. When you remove emotion from the equation, you make better decisions. There’s no holding onto a position because you think it might change. There’s only analyzing the facts and deciding based on what is happening, not what might happen.

IBM’s open APIs and developer-friendly portals charge per API call once a product is live. This sort of scalability makes AI accessible to anyone, regardless of size or motivation. And, as you can see from the below chart, ETF providers who aren’t taking advantage of AI are losing out on revenue.

Since AI doesn’t need to sleep, it can be working 24/7, even when the markets are closed, trying strategies that might be difficult to execute for traders. And because of the amount of data available, risk is mitigated because AI will know when to get out before it’s too late. An AI system can make daily stock recommendations that the ETF manager can then use to shift positions, increasing alpha.

Compete or Go Home

An important aspect of any AI strategy is partnering with external developers. Because, in order to compete with the top financial firms in your sector, you need to leverage machine learning or risk being left behind. In fact, you might already be.

“From the industry perspective, what’s brilliant about ETFs are they have the ability to work well under pressure. Any time we’ve seen dips or a bear market, we’ve seen ETFs be a good haven because all you’re doing is going to a different side of a trade.” – Global Asset Manager with >$1T AUM

The appeal of ETFs to investors is diversification. The ETF surge represents a shifting investment ecosystem away from active, toward passive. According to a Charles Schwab 2017 ETF Investor Survey, the percentage of ETF investors by demographic is as follows: 56% of Millennials, 44% of Gen X and 30% of Boomers. In fact, an astounding 96% of millennials see ETFs as a necessary part of their investment strategy, perhaps because they have less money available to invest.

Our current financial system is geared towards a much lower average life expectancy. Yet, as people live longer, their portfolios need more durability. So what is the liquidity of ETFs and the ability for ETF companies to unwind when, for example, a boomer needs to start drawing down? Or, what happens during a crunch?

Facing Liquidity

“I’m not worried about ETF liquidity. There’s always fear of that but I don’t think there’s suddenly going to be a liquidity drought in asset classes. It’s really at the very back of our heads.” – Large Pension Fund

Cash inflows to an ETF that has large holdings of a specific company could misprice a company blindly. “In the largest products, where most of the money sits, about 90% of trading that occurs is in the secondary market, according to Vanguard’s research. That means ETF investors are passing investments between themselves, and not having to transact with fund managers.”

Another reason for concern, a July report from Cirrus Research cites that, “companies with higher ETF exposure have steadily underperformed their counterparts since last June.” While the rise of robo advisors reflects this changing paradigm, a lack of understanding drives ETF demand and introduces risks. And it shows no signs of slowing down with 61% of millennials planning to increase their ETF positions. So while wealth managers used to be too expensive for the masses, automation is changing that and ETFs are democratizing the investment world.

ETFs played a role in the sell-off in 2015:

According to SEC, exchange-traded products experienced higher volume and volatility than standard stocks

Swings in price seemed arbitrary among otherwise similar ETFs

Many of the shares owned by investors were dealt by short sellers (unbeknownst to the investors)

As investors realize they own ‘synthetic’ ETF shares, the situation could explode

Before the Burst

Banks and trading firms happily sell and trade ETFs when the market is calm. When they can buy at a discount and sell at a premium, these firms will continue to offer ETFs in large quantity. But when that is no longer a probability or possibility, the suppliers of ETFs will most likely disappear, essentially undoing the entire system. But there are ways to fix the bubble.

‘Physical’ ETFs have much lower risk because they are actually hard backed by the underlying security. Diversifying with equities that aren’t usually tracked by ETFs can help avoid market cap bias.

How Close is the Burst?

Millennials are pouring their investment dollars into ETFs. They’re also the target of many of the robo advisors and FinTech’s helping investors begin to grow their wealth. Many of these robos and “set-it-and-forget-it” FinTechs are leveraging ETFs in their portfolios due to the lower price point, dollar-based investing, etc.

That said, could the potential burst or liquidity crunch be stalled due to the influx of Millennials investing in ETFs? Or is that a temporary distraction? Will the robos and FInTechs potentially suffer the same fate?

Case in point: look what happened to some of the robos that got squeezed during Brexit as people demanded access to their funds. Will this instance be a case of only time will tell, or are these brakes on their potential roller coaster?